Feminists Can Receive A Lesson From Jones' Harassment Suit

Stripped of the rhetoric, Hill's story, if true, boils down to this: Thomas asked her out a few times and made some lewd and crude remarks. If you described this to 100 people in 1990, chances are that at least 95 would have said, "So what?" Jones says that Clinton fondled her leg and, after being rebuffed, exposed himself and solicited oral sex. If you described this to 100 people in 1990 or 1960, chances are that 99 of them would have said, "This is outrageous." Indeed, such acts amount to a misdemeanor sexual offense.

Curiously, Jones' brother-in-law has told CNN that while he did not believe she had been sexually harassed by Clinton, he thought it entirely possible that she had been "propositioned." Had anyone made this distinction during the Hill-Thomas hearings, there would have been cries of "He just doesn't get it." But that's not what we hear nowadays from some of the women who coined that phrase.

"This is a marginal sexual harassment case at best," Eleanor Smeal, a former president of the National Organization for Women, pronounced on CNN & Company. "What the Supreme Court says is that there either must be a quid pro quo on sexual harassment, something that affects the conditions and terms of employment, or . . . a pervasive and severe atmosphere of sexual harassment, and indeed it must be shown that it was unwelcome."

Let's, by all means, stick to a strict legal definition. Where does that leave Hill, who did not claim to have suffered any retaliation for rejecting Thomas? Where would it leave Packwood's accusers, most of whom never worked for him and none of whom are claiming anything more than a one-time obnoxious come-on?

On the same panel, law professor Susan Estrich stressed that "innocence is still a defense" and added, "I think it's a very good thing for feminists to show - and maybe we show it in the case of a friend of ours, but so be it - that we're responsible enough to take a second look, that not all women necessarily are telling the truth, and not every complaint deserves to be used in a way which destroys a man."